Posted on 09/10/2002 8:32:22 PM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
CBS' Scott Pelley isn't the first person to observe that in a world of grays, President Bush sees mainly black and white.
But Pelley says there are aspects about the Bush's personality that might surprise some people during Bush's only TV interview this Sept. 11 anniversary week - on 60 Minutes II Wednesday at 8 p.m. ET/PT.
"There are times in the interview where he is pounding the desk, he's so angry," Pelley said Monday. "There are parts where tears are running down his face as he's describing the people (he) met in New York. Viewers are going to see a man who has a great deal more range of emotion that he betrays in public."
But they'll also see Bush repeating a familiar refrain: "He sees this (the war on terrorism) as a struggle between good an evil and he sees America as the leading champion of good in the world, with a responsibility to put an end to this evil wherever it is - way beyond Afghanistan."
Pelley spent 2 1/2 hours with Bush, speaking to him aboard Air Force One and at the White House. Pelley said Bush gets "a little testy. But I think he has fun with it: He likes the give and take."
Pelley also talked to 20 other Bush administration officials about their recollections of Sept. 11 and ensuing days.
But Pelley devotes a full 40 minutes of the show to examining what happened in the hours immediately after the attacks, when Bush remained largely aboard Air Force One instead of returning to the White House - a controversial move that Pelley came away thinking was justified.
By the end of the day it was Bush who overruled the Secret Service and ordered Air Force One to return to the the capital. "He said, 'Tell my wife to meet me at the White House' - and they did."
Pelley said that Bush is a bit like President Reagan - he paints the big picture but expects others to figure out the nitty-gritty - but someone who, in this case, needed to talk about the days that changed history.
"He was very engaged and thrilled to talk about it," Pelley said. "It was almost as if it seemed he needed to get it off his chest. He wanted to tell somebody about that week and what has been going through his mind."
So did Bill Clinton. The good actors have range.
Wow. So, you have seen this interview already?
Wow! That's cold.
If you look closely, you'll see that I copied a part of the original article into my post and placed it in italics. That would be the part I was responding to. It's kind of an unwritten standard to do it that way. I would expect you to have understood that, considering that is exactly what you did in posting to me -- even though you've never met me. ;-)
Not cold. Just simple honesty. I can't believe people are so gullible as to still be taken in by this hollywood crap. Oh, they can see right through it when the Democrats play the game, but the blinders go on the instant "their guy" is the one in the spotlight. It's just so embarrassing.
You think he does scheduled interviews without preparing his responses and practicing his segue between emotions?
I'm laughing at all the gomers who are ignorant enough to get sucked in by the hollywood production of a national interview. Politicians, Bush included, spend thousands and thousands of dollars for media consultants to work with them. You've seen Bush make impromptu comments and he is not a graceful speaker. It takes practice and preparation. He would be a fool if he didn't prepare in that way, so I'm not knocking him. However, I am very much knocking all the simpletons who fawn over his performance as if he was some kind of god on earth.
That's not fair. Just because someone is showing emotion in front of camera doesn't mean that it's not genuine. (as opposed to when Clinton went from laughing to crying at Ron Brown's funeral when he noticed a camera)
Clinton was a phony and a liar and most likely a murderer. I have no love for the Clinton family. However, that does not necessarily translate into mindless adoration of the Bush family. They are not royal. They are not an endowment from heaven. They are politicians, first and foremost. Never forget that.
No. With all due respect your opinion is cold and has nothing to do with honesty.
(And if, IMHO, you were "honest"---you would admit it.)
Neither the presence, nor the absence, of a wide range of emotions, in ones public demonor, proves a whole lot. To understand what is really happening, one first must become a truth seeker, then one can begin to recognize such when it passes by.
Until then, reactions to superficial behaviours are rather superficial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.